Analysis · Debate reply · beta

Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay

Bloc Québécois on Business of Supply 2026-05-05

174 words · 11 sentences · 15 clauses

Replying to Mario Simard (Bloc Québécois)

“Mr. Speaker, I heard my colleague from Winnipeg North say earlier that we need to support workers. We in the Bloc Québécois stand up day after day because we support Quebec workers. The main problem is that our colleagues opposite stand up and say that they are here to build Canada. Unfortunately, from what I have seen since the last election, they are here to build Canada while ignoring Quebec. All they talk about is oil and gas and the auto sector. I would like to hear my colleague’s thoughts on the double standard. In Quebec, the tariffs are hitting the forestry and aluminum sectors the hardest, but we are still waiting for a response from the government that lives up to our expectations.”

Statement grade

Average 90 / 100

A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.

Claims 86%Procedure 6%Reasoning 7%

This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.

Mr. Speaker, Claims · 34 wordsI have been a member of the Standing Committee on International Trade for a long time, and I have been working on this portfolio since I was first elected to the House of Commons.¹Off point Procedure · 11 wordsI can give numerous examples. I specifically remember one telling anecdote.Procedure Claims · 116 wordsThe United States had announced new softwood lumber tariffs and, at roughly the same time, it also announced the Inflation Reduction Act, ³which would have affected Canada’s auto industry.⁴ Both came at the same time. I was invited by the former minister of international trade, Ms. Ng, to go to Washington on an urgent mission.⁵ I thought we were going to discuss softwood lumber, but that did not come up at all.⁸ The only thing on the agenda was the auto industry.⁷ A short time later, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau sent out his mandate letters.⁶ There was not a word about softwood lumber in the then minister of international trade’s mandate letter.² Examples like this abound, Reasoning · 13 wordsand I think they illustrate the double standard my colleague was talking about.

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 90

2 of 4 deductions are Signal

Signal checks whether every part makes a point, gives a reason, or asks for action. A low score means the speaker filled time with fluff, pleasantries, or attacks.

Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “I can give numerous examples.”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “I specifically remember one telling anecdote.”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 72

2 of 4 deductions are Relevance

Relevance checks whether the speaker stays on topic and answers the question asked. A low score means the speaker dodged the issue. Measured against the point put to the member, and the motion under debate.

Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “I have been a member of the Standing Committee on International Trade for a long time,”About the member’s own committee experience, not the double standard raised.
Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate.What the tags mean “and I have been working on this portfolio since I was first elected to the House of Commons.”About the member’s personal time in office, not the point put.

Respect · 100

0 of 4 deductions are Respect

Respect checks whether the speaker argued with people’s positions and records rather than attacking the people: insults, mockery, or bad motives assigned to them. Criticism of what someone did, however strong, is not marked.

Nothing lost points.

Clarity · 100

0 of 4 deductions are Clarity

Clarity checks for plain speaking, clear ownership of actions, and honest limits on certainty. A low score means vague promises or evasive language.

Nothing lost points.

Claims · 8

This list shows the factual statements you can check for yourself: the words as said, and the claim restated to stand on its own.

1“I have been working on this portfolio since I was first elected to the House of Commons.”Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay has been working on the international trade portfolio since being first elected to the House of Commons.search
2“There was not a word about softwood lumber in the then minister of international trade’s mandate letter.”The mandate letter of the international trade minister did not mention softwood lumber.search
3“The United States had announced new softwood lumber tariffs and, at roughly the same time, it also announced the Inflation Reduction Act”The United States announced new softwood lumber tariffs and the Inflation Reduction Act at roughly the same time.search
4“which would have affected Canada’s auto industry.”The Inflation Reduction Act would have affected Canada’s auto industry.search
5“I was invited by the former minister of international trade, Ms. Ng, to go to Washington on an urgent mission.”Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay was invited by the former minister of international trade, Ms. Ng, to go to Washington on an urgent mission.search
6“Prime Minister Justin Trudeau sent out his mandate letters.”Prime Minister Justin Trudeau sent out his mandate letters.search
7“The only thing on the agenda was the auto industry.”The agenda for the mission to Washington focused only on the auto industry.search
8“but that did not come up at all.”The discussion of softwood lumber did not come up during the mission to Washington.search

Analysed on 2026-10-20